Blam, I'm pinging you because of our common interest in the Richard Firestone book. BTW, I'm up to about page 150.
| Catastrophism ping list | ||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Posted on 02/21/2005 6:40:07 AM PST by frithguild
The brightest gamma ray burst ever recorded arrived on December 27, 2004 at Universal Time 21 hours, 30 minutes. The blast was 100 times more intense than any burst that had been previously recorded, equaling the brightness of the full Moon, but at gamma ray wavelengths. Gamma ray counts spiked to a maximum in 1.5 seconds and then declined over a 5 minute period with 7.57 second pulsations. It was determined to have originated from SGR 1806-20, a neutron star 20 kilometers in diameter which rotates once every 7.5 seconds, matching the GRB pulsation period. SGR 1806-20 is located about 10 degrees northeast of the Galactic center and about 45,000 light years from us, or about twice as far away as the Galactic center. It released more energy in a tenth of a second than the Sun emits in 100,000 years. Other gamma ray bursts have been detected whose explosions were intrinsically more powerful than this one, but since they originated in other galaxies quite distant from our own, they were not nearly as bright. What makes this gamma ray burst unique is that it is the first time that such a bright burst has been observed, one that also happens to originate from within our own Galaxy.
An explosion of our Galaxy's core, however, would produce a burst far more intense than this. SGR 1806-20 has been estimated to have a stellar progenitor mass of 150 solar masses, whereas our Galactic core has a mass of 2.6 million solar masses. In its present active phase SGR 1806-20 is estimated to have a luminosity 40 million times that of the Sun, whereas during its active phase the Galactic center could reach luminosities of 400 trillion times that of the Sun. So it is understandable that if the Galactic center were to erupt, it would produce a gamma ray burst far more intense than the outburst from this star.
In his 1983 Ph.D. dissertation, Paul LaViolette called attention to terrestrial dangers of high intensity gamma ray bursts originating from within our Galaxy, particularly from the GC, writing also about their associated EMP effects (e.g., see Page 3). Gamma ray bursts at that time had just begun to be discovered, and at that time no one was concerned with them as potential terrestrial hazards. In recent years scientific opinion has come around to adopt LaViolette's concern, as can be seen in news articles discussing the SGR 1806-20 gamma ray outburst, e.g., see Space.com news story. They note that if this gamma ray burst had been as close as 10 light years it would have completely destroyed to ozone layer. By comparison, the Galactic superwaves LaViolette has postulated to have impacted the Solar system during the last ice age would have showered the solar system with cosmic ray electrons having an energy intensity 100 times greater than this hypothetical 10 light year distant stellar gamma ray burst.
In his dissertation, LaViolette also noted that a strong gravity wave might travel forward at the forefront of a superwave and might be the first signal indication of a superwave's arrival. He pointed out that such gravity waves could induce substantial tidal forces on the Earth during their passage which could induce earthquakes and cause polar axis torquing effects. Experiments carried out by Eugene Podkletnov with shock front outbursts show that they produce a longitudinal gravitational wave that travels forward at superluminal speeds (in excess of 67 times the speed of light). Also Guy Obolensky has observed electrostatic potential shocks to propagate forward at speeds as high as 7 times the speed of light. Observations suggest that the gravity wave from an expanding stellar explosion will decrease its superluminal speed and eventually approach the speed of light. But meanwhile, the gravity wave will have gotten a headstart over the electromagnetic wave component (light, gamma rays, etc.). So one would expect that earthquake activity would precede the gamma ray burst component of a superwave. The same should be expected of smaller gamma ray outbursts if their gravity waves were sufficiently strong to trigger noticeable earthquake activity.
In view of the above, it is interesting that the December 27th gamma ray burst, the most intense in the 25 year history of gamma ray burst observation happened to follow the 9.2 Richter Indonesian earthquake and tsunami of December 26th by just 44.6 hours! Like the December 27th GRB, this earthquake was unique, being about ten times stronger than the next most intense earthquake to occur during the past 25 years. It, then, seems difficult to pass off the temporal proximity of these two class one events as just as a matter of coincidence.
• Indonesian earthquake and tsunami: December 26, 2004 at 00 hours 58 minutes UT
• SGR 1806-20 gamma ray burst: December 27, 2004 at 21 hours 36 minutes UT
A time span of 25 years compared to ~45 hours, a ratio of about 5000:1. In fact, many have inquired if there might be a connection between these two events (e.g., see the Space.com article). The reason why astronomers have been reluctant to admit there is a connection is that they know of no mechanism by which gamma rays by themselves could trigger earthquakes. They admit that gamma rays could slightly affect the ionization state of the Earth's atmosphere, but it is questionable that this would somehow cause earthquakes. However, if a longitudinal gravity potential wave pulse were to accompany a gamma ray burst, the mystery becomes resolved. The connection between earthquakes and gamma ray bursts becomes plausible.
In his book Earth Under Fire (as well as in his dissertation), LaViolette presents evidence showing that the superwave that passed through the solar system around 14,200 years ago had triggered supernova explosions as it swept through the Galaxy. Among these was the Vela and Crab supernova explosions whose explosion dates align with this superwave event horizon. One way this could be explained is if this superwave had a gravity wave component whose disturbance triggered unstable stars as it passed through them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those interested in monitoring earthquake, gamma ray burst, and cosmic ray background activity are referred to the following websites:
• Earthquakes (current): http://earthquake.usgs.gov/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_all.html
• Earthquakes (past): http://earthquake.usgs.gov/activity/past.htmlpast.html
• Gamma ray bursts: http://grad40.as.utexas.edu/grblog.php?author=D.%20Gotz
• Cosmic ray radiation intensity: http://cr0.izmiran.rssi.ru/mosc/main.htm
• Gravity wave bursts (LIGO site: no posted data, just posted papers): http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/ and http://www.ligo.org/results/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The December 27th GRB was not accompanied by any rise in the cosmic ray background, indicating that if it was accompanied by cosmic rays their intensity was unable to exceed the relatively constant extragalactic background flux arriving from distant galaxies. A Galactic superwave, on the other hand, would most likely produce a substantial rise in these levels.
LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory) research team has investigated whether there might be a correlation between their gravity wave data and a particularly strong gamma ray burst 030329 that was recorded in 2003 and identified with a supernova occurring in a galaxy about 2600 light years away. They found no correlation with their data. However, they operated on the stated assumption that the gravity wave would have traveled at the speed of light and would have been nearly coincident with the gamma ray pulse. Experiments with gravitational shock fronts however suggests that their hypothesis is incorrect, that the gravity wave should actually precede the gamma ray pulse. The December 27th gamma ray pulse had a much higher intensity, so there is a possibility that the proposed December 26th gravity wave is registered in their data.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note that almost two months passed before the December 27th gamma ray burst found its way into news media stories. If very major activity were to occur in the near future as the beginning stages of a superwave arrival, hopefully scientists will not keep it to themselves and news media will pick up the story quickly to inform the world.
Absolutely not. Its because of Global Warming which is entirely under man's control.
It is close enough that it needs to be studied more, but I dont believe in coincidences either....
This looks like a standard correllation/causation fallacy. Nothing to see here.
From the article: "Experiments carried out by Eugene Podkletnov with shock front outbursts show that they produce a longitudinal gravitational wave that travels forward at superluminal speeds (in excess of 67 times the speed of light). Also Guy Obolensky has observed electrostatic potential shocks to propagate forward at speeds as high as 7 times the speed of light. Observations suggest that the gravity wave from an expanding stellar explosion will decrease its superluminal speed and eventually approach the speed of light.
A superluminal phenomenon is a frame of reference traveling with a speed greater than the speed of light c. There is a putative class of particles dubbed tachyons which are able to travel faster than light. Faster-than-light phenomena violate the usual understanding of the "flow" of time, a state of affairs which is known as the causality problem (and also called the "Shalimar Treaty")."
Other food for thought, i.e., are gravitons tachyons?: It should be noted that while Einstein's theory of special relativity prevents (real) mass, energy, or information from traveling faster than the speed of light c (Lorentz et al. 1952, Brillouin and Sommerfeld 1960, Born and Wolf 1999, Landau and Lifschitz 1997), there is nothing preventing "apparent" motion faster than c (or, in fact, with negative speeds, implying arrival at a destination before leaving the origin). For example, the phase velocity and group velocity of a wave may exceed the speed of light, but in such cases, no energy or information actually travels faster than c. Experiments showing group velocities greater than c include that of Wang et al. (2000), who produced a laser pulse in atomic cesium gas with a group velocity of . In each case, the observed superluminal propagation is not at odds with causality, and is instead a consequence of classical interference between its constituent frequency components in a region of anomalous dispersion (Wang et al. 2000).
It turns out that all relativistic wave equations possesses infinity families of formal solutions with arbitrary speeds raging from zero to infinity, called undistorted progressive waves (UPWs) by Rodrigues and Lu (1997). However, like the arbitrary-speed plane wave solutions, UPWs have infinite energy and therefore cannot be produced in the physical world. However, approximations to these waves with finite energy, called finite aperture approximations (FAA), can be produced and observed experimentally (Maiorino and Rodrigues 1999). Among the infinite family of exact superluminal solutions of the homogeneous wave equation and Maxwell equations are waves known as X-waves. X-waves do not violate special relativity because all superluminal X-waves have wavefronts that travel with the speed parameter c (the speed of light) that appears in the corresponding wave equation. The superluminal motion of the peak is therefore a transitory phenomenon similar to the reshaping phenomenon that occurs (under very special conditions) for waves in dispersive media with absorption or gain and which is in this case responsible for superluminal (or even negative) group velocities (Maiorino and Rodrigues 1999).
Several authors have published theories claiming that the speed-of-light barrier imposed by relativity is illusionary. While these "theories" continue to be rejected by the physics community as ill-informed speculation, their proponents continue to promulgate them in rather obscure journals. An example of this kind is the Smarandache hypothesis, which states that there is no such thing as a speed limit in the universe (Smarandache 1998). Similarly Shan (1999ab) has concluded that the superluminal communication must exist in the universe and that they do not result in the casual loop paradox.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Superluminal.html See also: http://www.kevin.harkess.btinternet.co.uk/wisp_ch_5/wisp_ch_5.html#5_3_5
Wasn't Galleleo accused of that type of reasoning?
"--a gravitational wave traveling at 67 times the speed of light--???"
Moronic. It sucks how completely inept talking heads for news networks are when it comes to even the most basic scientific principles.
Lets see:
After the Columbia disaster, a reporter on one of the alphabet networks reported that the shuttle was going "18 times the speed of light" at the time. (A pretty good clip, wouldn't you say?)
After Spirit and Opportunity landed, another asked a NASA scientist during an interview if the rovers "could find the flag that they put there" back in the 60's. )We've been to Mars and put a flag there? I never the memo.)
Also, after Bush made his speech about the new space initiative he had in mind, a reporter enlightened us to the possiblity of "moon-based aircraft" (moon-based AIRCRAFT, that's a new one to me)
Not to mention how when Spirit landed they had some of it live, history was being made LIVE, and they cut away to a Kobe Bryant panty sniffing session (which they had done MANY hours of that same day already). They are such lowly idiots, their brains just don't function on the level the rest of ours do. Pitiful and pathetic and SAD. And to think these certified morons have the power to shape public opinion. Sometimes I wonder if we are doomed.
Bones
It's just a coincidence.
Gamma rays from thunderstorms?
May 03, 2005
http://www.physorg.com/news3959.html
"Duke University engineers have led the most detailed analyses of links between some lightning events and mysterious gamma ray emissions that emanate from earth's own atmosphere. Their study suggests that this gamma radiation fountains upward from starting points surprisingly low in thunderclouds. Counter-intuitively, these strong gamma outbursts also seem to precede associated lightning discharges by a split second."
Okay guys, from what I've been reading lately, there's NO REASON why a gravity wave cannot be faster than light. As a matter of fact, that seems to be the norm.
A new Electrostatic antenna also shows Faster Than Light capability. http://www.wbabin.net/erdmann/erdmann.htm
(Be sure to look at their experimental verification of FTL transmission. Very interesting experiment that is easily reproduced.)
Tesla wrote about the superluminal velocities of longitudinal waves when he DISCOVERED them.
The Hodowanec "Gravity Wave Detector" circuit detected gravity waves which correspond with the solstice event, but arrive exactly 8.3 minutes ahead of the observed visual event. In other words, gravity travled at near REALTIME compared to light.
An excellent article on observed FTL phenomenon here: http://home.gwi.net/~erichard/fastlit.htm
Several Scalar detector designs reveiwed here http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/bark.html
After looking at the links above, I don't think you'll have a such a hard time with a gravitational pulse arriving ahead of it's corresponding Gamma pulse. The antenna experiment alone is enough to call "light speed" into question as the absolute maximum universal speed limit.
bump for later reading
It wouldn't surprise me that "sprites" and related electromagnetic phenomena are the cause of these gamma ray bursts.
:')
| Catastrophism ping list | ||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Buy stock in companies that may 'strap-down' materials?
It, then, seems difficult to pass off the temporal proximity of these two class one events as just as a matter of coincidence.
• Indonesian earthquake and tsunami: December 26, 2004 at 00 hours 58 minutes UT
• SGR 1806-20 gamma ray burst: December 27, 2004 at 21 hours 36 minutes UT
A time span of 25 years compared to ~45 hours, a ratio of about 5000:1. In fact, many have inquired if there might be a connection between these two events
---<>---<>---<>---<>---<>---
This IS very suggestive. I can easily see reasons for this lead time having something to do with "gravity waves"... Certainly, it is not "proof", but it is easy to come up with experimental studies based on the concept.
Ain't it the truth. Innerstin stuff.
BTW, I didn't notice in the excerpt(?) posted here, but in the referenced article, the equipment that could/should have been able to measure any gravity wave was not operating at the time -- talk about coincidence.
If there had been any activity measured at the time, well.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.